SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(APTEL) 139


BEFORE THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR ELECTRICITY (Appellate Jurisdiction)
IA No. 491 OF 2025 Dated: 28th April, 2025 Present : Hon`ble Mr. Justice Ramesh Ranganathan, Chairperson Hon`ble Ms. Seema Gupta, Technical Member (Electricity)
In the matter of:
AMP Energy Green Seventeen Private Limited Through its Authorized Signatory
309, 3rd Floor, Rectangle One, ....
Appellant(s)
Behind Sheraton Hotel Saket, New Delhi- 110017 Versus
11.
West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission Through its Secretary Plot No: AH/5 (2nd & 4th Floor)
Action Area 1A, Newtown ....
Rajarhat, Kolkata- 700163 Respondent No.1
22. CESC Limited Through its Authorized Signatory CESC House, Chowringhee Square Kolkata- 700001 …. Respondent No.2 Counsel on record for the Appellant(s) : Mannat Waraich Ananya Goswami Mridul Gupta Ashabari Basu Thakur Counsel on record for the Respondent(s) : C.K. Rai for Res. 1 Sanjeev K. Kapoor Divya Chaturvedi Saransh Shaw Srishti Rai Jai Dhanani for Res. 2

ORDER

PER HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN, CHAIRPERSON I.INTRODUCTION:

The present Appeal has been preferred against the Final Order passed by the WBERC in Case No. PPA-125/23-24 dated 31.08.2024 on the ground that it was an order passed without jurisdiction. The appeal was filed with a delay of 374 days and, vide the present IA, this Tribunal is called upon to examine whether the delay ought to be condoned or not. The Appellant has sought to justify the delay in filing the appeal against the Order passed by the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission, in Case No. PPA-125/23-24 dated 31.08.2023, on the ground that the Impugned Order was passed by the WBERC without jurisdiction in relation to approval of PPA and adoption of tariff pursuant to the Ministry of Power's Guidelines for Tariff Based Competitive Bidding Process for procurement of power from Grid Connected Wind Solar Hybrid Projects, 2020.

II.PLEADINGS:

a.APPLICATION SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY:

I.A,No.1787 of 2024 in DFR No. 478 of 2024 has been filed by the applicant-appellant seeking condonation of delay of 374 days in filing the appeal. The Appeal, in DFR No. 478 of 2024, has been preferred by the appellant challenging the legality and veracity of the Final Orderpassed by the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission in Case No. PPA- 125/23-24 dated 31.08.2023. The appellant claims that, in the said Impugned Order, the WBERC has wrongfully assumed jurisdiction and adopted the tariff at Rs.2.92/kWh, and has also approved the Power Purchase Agreement dated 28.06.2023 executed by Applicant and CESC Limited for purchase of 150 MW AC Wind-Solar Hybrid power for supply of power inter-state for a period of 25 years at the aforementioned rate of tariff.

In the application seeking condonation of delay, the applicant- appellant submits that, pursuant to the Impugned Order, the Applicant had proceeded with the execution of the Project; it expeditiously took various steps including making requests before the relevant party for transfer of the wind and solar capacities, entering into an Agreement for transfer of the said capacities, and thereafter undertaking various developmental activities as required for setting up of the Project; additionally, the Applicant has been submitting Monthly Progress Report pertaining to the Project to the Respondent No. 2 on a regular basis; however, the project activities were brought to a standstill due to the occurrence of certain events like cancellation of the capacity transfer proceedings with immediate effect on account of renewable energy power policies and observations of the Government of Andhra Pradesh; further, on 05.06.2024, the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued an administrative Order to the effect that any file involving allotment of lands, release of funds etc would not be further processed by any authority, thereby making it impossible for the Applicant to procure land parcels for setting up of the Project; after assessing the scenario at hand, the Applicant concluded that there would be a delay in achieving the SCOD of the Project, and such delays were on account of government actions which could be construed as Force Majeure event(s) within the provisions of the PPA; accordingly, the Applicant proceeded to issue Force Majeure Notice dated 24.07.2024 to Respondent No. 2 and, subsequently, requested for extension of SCOD on account of Force Majeure vide its letter dated 09.08.2024; however, Respondent No. 2, vide its letter dated 22.08.2024, denied such request of the Applicant, and asked them to complete execution of the Project within the timeline prescribed under the PPA.

The applicant further states that, aggrieved by such denial by Respondent No. 2, in September/October 2024, the Applicant proceeded to take legal advise and assistance for the purpose of filing a Petition before the Appropriate Commission seeking extension of time to achieve the SCOD on account of Force Majeure; it is at this juncture, i.e. at th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top